Recent Topics
3rd Shift, How To Adjust?
by Delta. 10/21/18 09:54 AM
Looking at Ford Fusions
by krismoriah72. 10/21/18 08:24 AM
Pf 56 AC DELCO FIts What Engines???
by Driz. 10/21/18 07:12 AM
What oil to use and how soon
by neil57. 10/21/18 06:41 AM
Learned Some Realtor Slang The Other Day
by LoneRanger. 10/21/18 05:29 AM
Need advice on some cheap cars
by HorseThief. 10/21/18 02:29 AM
Acdelco Dexos 2 - 5W-40
by virginoil. 10/21/18 01:21 AM
Looking for Good Value H8 49AGM Battery
by 1JZ_E46. 10/20/18 11:01 PM
2018 X3 xDrive 3.0 impressions
by MCompact. 10/20/18 10:13 PM
UOA Pennzoil Plat. 5/40 Euro results
by TurboJW. 10/20/18 09:34 PM
Is bleeding the ABS necessary when bleeding the brakes?
by JLawrence08648. 10/20/18 08:17 PM
Check out my poor condition brakes
by maxdustington. 10/20/18 06:46 PM
Mechanics or engineers explain this
by 97prizm. 10/20/18 06:39 PM
Does this sound like a virus or file corruption?
by Hemispheres. 10/20/18 06:30 PM
Toyota 0w-20, 12,029 km, 2010 RAV4, 2.5 L
by IanInCalgary. 10/20/18 05:47 PM
Quinoa
by 53' Stude. 10/20/18 05:15 PM
Vunerable Routers
by Donald. 10/20/18 04:15 PM
Newest Members
WagonWheel, zsero, fsaid92, KalapanaBlack, oe542
66255 Registered Users
Who's Online Now
89 registered members (asker123, 97prizm, beanoil, bakechad, 1foxracing, 14Accent, 8 invisible), 1,686 guests, and 35 spiders.
Key: Admin, Global Mod, Mod
Forum Statistics
Forums67
Topics292,264
Posts4,876,987
Members66,255
Most Online2,494
Oct 17th, 2018
Donate to BITOG
Previous Thread
Next Thread
Print Thread
Hop To
Engine friction reduction trends #4830433
08/03/18 06:05 PM
08/03/18 06:05 PM
Joined: Oct 2005
Posts: 5,034
Fredericksburg, VA
JAG Offline OP
JAG  Offline OP
Joined: Oct 2005
Posts: 5,034
Fredericksburg, VA
The main points should be familiar to those of us who read oil papers, but Iím posting it because itís a good paper. Itís from 2016.

The statements below are not all in the paper. Some come from other sources.
Thinner oils push the lubricant regimes to the left on the Stribeck curve. Yep, itís still true...darn physics.
Friction modifiers help reduce mechanical friction when asperity contact occurs. Fuel economy benefits of thin oils are especially realized (compared to thicker oils) when friction modifiers are added because of the increased asperity contact caused by thin oils.
Near the top and bottom dead center piston positions are the problematic regions due to the low relative speeds there causing oil film thickness collapse. The piston rocking back and forth there makes it even worse for the film separating the piston skirts from cylinder walls. There, the shear rates are very low, so low-shear rate kinematic viscosity is the driver rather than the high shear rate like is used in the HTHS test.

The paper: https://link.springer.com/content/pdf/10.1007%2Fs40544-016-0107-9.pdf

Re: Engine friction reduction trends [Re: JAG] #4830466
08/03/18 07:10 PM
08/03/18 07:10 PM
Joined: Feb 2014
Posts: 2,310
Kansan,1911 45ACP fan
Marco620 Offline
Marco620  Offline
Joined: Feb 2014
Posts: 2,310
Kansan,1911 45ACP fan
Interesting... Very interesting. So.. Keep using redline 0w20 in my car, right??


15' Civic R18Z1 189k.0w20 Redline/Archoil9200,Eibach,Tanabe&Tein Suspension/Borla Exhaust/XG7317
Right to work state proud.
Re: Engine friction reduction trends [Re: JAG] #4830506
08/03/18 07:58 PM
08/03/18 07:58 PM
Joined: Dec 2017
Posts: 1,159
US
JLTD Offline
JLTD  Offline
Joined: Dec 2017
Posts: 1,159
US
popcorn

(and also don't have time for the whole article right now)


I'm a thickie; assimilate
But 20s have their place

Using AMSOIL‚ĄĘ

Hers: 2008 Jeep Liberty 138k, SS 5w30/Amsoil

His: 2015 4Runner 41k, OE 5w20/Wix

Re: Engine friction reduction trends [Re: Marco620] #4830515
08/03/18 08:03 PM
08/03/18 08:03 PM
Joined: Feb 2005
Posts: 1,786
Arizona
bulwnkl Offline
bulwnkl  Offline
Joined: Feb 2005
Posts: 1,786
Arizona
Originally Posted By: Marco620
Interesting... Very interesting. So.. Keep using redline 0w20 in my car, right??


Maybe, maybe not...
If this is an overriding or controlling issue:
Quote:
Near the top and bottom dead center piston positions are the problematic regions due to the low relative speeds there causing oil film thickness collapse. The piston rocking back and forth there makes it even worse for the film separating the piston skirts from cylinder walls. There, the shear rates are very low, so low-shear rate kinematic viscosity is the driver rather than the high shear rate like is used in the HTHS test.


then you'd want a fluid with a higher kinematic viscosity, but not really a higher dynamic (HTHS) viscosity. Or, in other words, kind of the opposite of what you get from Redline's fluids: A reasonably '[censored]' 10W30 rather than a Redline-type 0W20.

...but that's only _if_ that one quoted principle is overriding or controlling in terms of overall wear that leads to engine failure or replacement.

Re: Engine friction reduction trends [Re: JAG] #4830599
08/03/18 09:34 PM
08/03/18 09:34 PM
Joined: Aug 2018
Posts: 272
N.A.
Onetor Offline
Onetor  Offline
Joined: Aug 2018
Posts: 272
N.A.
What a paper to digest. I think I need to read it twice. I'm a newbie,,,,

Re: Engine friction reduction trends [Re: Onetor] #4830623
08/03/18 10:15 PM
08/03/18 10:15 PM
Joined: Mar 2016
Posts: 1,481
Western S.C. since 1996
CR94 Offline
CR94  Offline
Joined: Mar 2016
Posts: 1,481
Western S.C. since 1996
Originally Posted By: Onetor
What a paper to digest. I think I need to read it twice. I'm a newbie,,,,
Yeah. They throw in a little of everything---plus more than a few typos. Yes, I made it all the way through.


2011 Toyota Prius now at 93K
1981 Mazda GLC (323) retired at 606K
1972 Subaru DL retired at 190K
1954 Chevrolet retired at 121K
Re: Engine friction reduction trends [Re: JAG] #4837695
08/11/18 10:18 PM
08/11/18 10:18 PM
Joined: Jul 2010
Posts: 18,941
PNW
ZeeOSix Offline
ZeeOSix  Offline
Joined: Jul 2010
Posts: 18,941
PNW
Originally Posted By: JAG
Near the top and bottom dead center piston positions are the problematic regions due to the low relative speeds there causing oil film thickness collapse. The piston rocking back and forth there makes it even worse for the film separating the piston skirts from cylinder walls. There, the shear rates are very low, so low-shear rate kinematic viscosity is the driver rather than the high shear rate like is used in the HTHS test.


These graphs were posted in another thread awhile ago - don't recall which thread or by who. Shows that ring wear is a function of oil temp, oil HTHS rating and engine RPM. Still shows that higher HTSH will reduce ring wear in certain operating conditions. Also, it's pretty typical that higher viscosity oils will also have higher HTHS ratings.

Another reason to use thicker oil IMO is to reduce ring wear based on these graphs ... especially if you're pushing the engine hard (load and RPM), and elevating the oil temperatures above what you'd see in normal street driving.





Re: Engine friction reduction trends [Re: ZeeOSix] #4888783
10/05/18 11:28 PM
10/05/18 11:28 PM
Joined: May 2005
Posts: 106
Tucson
neo3 Online content
neo3  Online Content
Joined: May 2005
Posts: 106
Tucson
Originally Posted by ZeeOSix


These graphs were posted in another thread awhile ago - don't recall which thread or by who. Shows that ring wear is a function of oil temp, oil HTHS rating and engine RPM. Still shows that higher HTSH will reduce ring wear in certain operating conditions. Also, it's pretty typical that higher viscosity oils will also have higher HTHS ratings.

Another reason to use thicker oil IMO is to reduce ring wear based on these graphs ... especially if you're pushing the engine hard (load and RPM), and elevating the oil temperatures above what you'd see in normal street driving.

[Linked Image]

[Linked Image]


I'm not seeing the same conclusion from those graphs, especially the 2nd one that seems to show that an HTHS of 2.6 has the minimum average wear over the entire rpm range. That HTHS would be typical for a "thinner" oil (XW20) wouldn't it? (Also, they really need another data point in there around 2.9.) Maybe I should change my preference for using "thicker" oil (picked up from reading too much stuff on this site LOL). It would be useful to have a link or citation for the graphs.

Re: Engine friction reduction trends [Re: JAG] #4891367
10/08/18 07:50 PM
10/08/18 07:50 PM
Joined: Mar 2016
Posts: 1,481
Western S.C. since 1996
CR94 Offline
CR94  Offline
Joined: Mar 2016
Posts: 1,481
Western S.C. since 1996
^^ Agree with neo3. There are also odd inconsistencies in speed vs. wear in those plots. What is "h·piece" in the vertical axis? (I assume something related to run time or number of revolutions.)


2011 Toyota Prius now at 93K
1981 Mazda GLC (323) retired at 606K
1972 Subaru DL retired at 190K
1954 Chevrolet retired at 121K
Re: Engine friction reduction trends [Re: neo3] #4891462
10/08/18 09:36 PM
10/08/18 09:36 PM
Joined: Jul 2010
Posts: 18,941
PNW
ZeeOSix Offline
ZeeOSix  Offline
Joined: Jul 2010
Posts: 18,941
PNW
Originally Posted by neo3
I'm not seeing the same conclusion from those graphs, especially the 2nd one that seems to show that an HTHS of 2.6 has the minimum average wear over the entire rpm range. That HTHS would be typical for a "thinner" oil (XW20) wouldn't it? (Also, they really need another data point in there around 2.9.) Maybe I should change my preference for using "thicker" oil (picked up from reading too much stuff on this site LOL). It would be useful to have a link or citation for the graphs.


The 2nd graph is showing that increased wear can occur for oils that are less than 2.6 HTHS when oil temperature gets elevated some. But it also says if you are using a 20 wt you really have no headroom, but are right at the verge of having more engine wear is the oil temps start to rise above "normal". Look how the wear rates all increase when you go a hair below 2.6. Personally, I don't want to always be operating on the edge of the wear cliff when pushing the engine hard. HTHS of 2.6 is probably fine for tootling around like grandma on the streets. grin2 Notice the wear is basically flat lined for the 2000 RPM case, regardless of the HTHS.

Re: Engine friction reduction trends [Re: JAG] #4891777
10/09/18 10:37 AM
10/09/18 10:37 AM
Joined: Feb 2005
Posts: 1,786
Arizona
bulwnkl Offline
bulwnkl  Offline
Joined: Feb 2005
Posts: 1,786
Arizona
Yes, those generalities do seem to be in there, but there also appears to be a very large amount of variation (scatter, really) such that those graphs are not adequate to give me a visual representation I can have confidence in.

Re: Engine friction reduction trends [Re: JAG] #4891993
10/09/18 03:16 PM
10/09/18 03:16 PM
Joined: Mar 2016
Posts: 1,481
Western S.C. since 1996
CR94 Offline
CR94  Offline
Joined: Mar 2016
Posts: 1,481
Western S.C. since 1996
^^ Yes. It's interesting that 2.6 mPa·s appears to protect better than 3.1 at most speeds---unless that's merely an artifact of the scatter.


2011 Toyota Prius now at 93K
1981 Mazda GLC (323) retired at 606K
1972 Subaru DL retired at 190K
1954 Chevrolet retired at 121K

BOB IS THE OIL GUY® Powered by UBB.threads™